I am starting to prefer comboboxes than textboxes
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: VB6 application with manifest file
Next: Asking Advice
From: Dee Earley on 26 Feb 2010 04:31 On 25/02/2010 21:56, MM wrote: > Correct. Totally. What I think is happening in this thread with some > respondents is that they took up an original stance and will now not > back down for fear of losing the argument. Nor will you. You asked our opinions about a non standard use of a control. We (many of us) pointed you to a better suited control (ignoring your personal dislike to an established standard) You (and one other) still insist your "better" method is the best thing since the wheel. -- Dee Earley (dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk) i-Catcher Development Team iCode Systems
From: Dee Earley on 26 Feb 2010 04:33 On 25/02/2010 21:58, MM wrote: > On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:25:22 -0000, "Dave O."<nobody(a)nowhere.com> > wrote: > >> >> "duke"<nospama(a)3web.net> wrote in message >> news:8e4e9973-9a85-457f-84c4-e336850b0f60(a)15g2000yqi.googlegroups.com... >>> I usually like to follow up on threads where I have commented to see >>> if there is anything else that I might suggest. >>> In this case I was the second person to express my opinion and have >>> read all 56 other responses. >>> >>> My question to MM is: "What have you concluded after all the >>> comments on this matter?" >>> >>> Duke >> >> I suspect he will conclude that he is right and everybody else is wrong. > > No, not EVERYbody else! Of course, one person did agree with MM out of ~13. -- Dee Earley (dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk) i-Catcher Development Team iCode Systems
From: MM on 26 Feb 2010 06:26 On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:31:30 +0000, Dee Earley <dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk> wrote: > >On 25/02/2010 21:56, MM wrote: >> Correct. Totally. What I think is happening in this thread with some >> respondents is that they took up an original stance and will now not >> back down for fear of losing the argument. > >Nor will you. > >You asked our opinions about a non standard use of a control. >We (many of us) pointed you to a better suited control (ignoring your >personal dislike to an established standard) >You (and one other) still insist your "better" method is the best thing >since the wheel. The spin control is not "better suited". I've just fired up Word 97 and everywhere I look I see dropdown lists: font, font size, page view per cent, tables and borders line thickness, envelope options size, printing feed from, and so on. And that is just a 20 second perusal of one application. I have yet to see a spin control. MM
From: Dee Earley on 26 Feb 2010 08:16 On 26/02/2010 11:26, MM wrote: > On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:31:30 +0000, Dee Earley > <dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk> wrote: > >> >> On 25/02/2010 21:56, MM wrote: >>> Correct. Totally. What I think is happening in this thread with some >>> respondents is that they took up an original stance and will now not >>> back down for fear of losing the argument. >> >> Nor will you. >> >> You asked our opinions about a non standard use of a control. >> We (many of us) pointed you to a better suited control (ignoring your >> personal dislike to an established standard) >> You (and one other) still insist your "better" method is the best thing >> since the wheel. > > The spin control is not "better suited". Of course it is. The spin control and associated text box is specifically designed to allow to user to select/enter a number. While you can use a hammer for banging in stakes, a mallet is far more suitable, whereas a hammer is better left for nails. > I've just fired up Word 97 > and everywhere I look I see dropdown lists: font, font size, page view > per cent, tables and borders line thickness, envelope options size, > printing feed from, and so on. And that is just a 20 second perusal of > one application. I have yet to see a spin control. As I said, font size (and a few of the others you mention) is an exception as the values are non contiguous and defined by the font itself. I guess there is a reason they changed the others to use more suitable controls for 2007... :p -- Dee Earley (dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk) i-Catcher Development Team iCode Systems
From: MM on 26 Feb 2010 11:42
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:16:32 +0000, Dee Earley <dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk> wrote: >On 26/02/2010 11:26, MM wrote: >> On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:31:30 +0000, Dee Earley >> <dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 25/02/2010 21:56, MM wrote: >>>> Correct. Totally. What I think is happening in this thread with some >>>> respondents is that they took up an original stance and will now not >>>> back down for fear of losing the argument. >>> >>> Nor will you. >>> >>> You asked our opinions about a non standard use of a control. >>> We (many of us) pointed you to a better suited control (ignoring your >>> personal dislike to an established standard) >>> You (and one other) still insist your "better" method is the best thing >>> since the wheel. >> >> The spin control is not "better suited". > >Of course it is. The spin control and associated text box is >specifically designed to allow to user to select/enter a number. > >While you can use a hammer for banging in stakes, a mallet is far more >suitable, whereas a hammer is better left for nails. Well, you may prefer using tiny little arrows that are so small they look like specks of dust, but I don't. Also, taking Karl's UpDown example, sure, it functions fine, apart from the arrow heads being smaller than gnat's balls, but look at the amount of code involved, over 800 lines of it just in the class. All I need to do is create a loop to load the value range into the combobox - done. E.g. With Combo1 For i = 0 To 127 .AddItem i Next .ListIndex = 0 End With Plus around 230 lines of code for Aaron Young's typomatic class. Also, my combobox implementation lets Home or End move the selected value to the beginning or end of the list. It feels far nicer to use than the spinner. MM |